MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797572792 · doi:10.7939/r3vm4342b

Economics of Hybrid Poplar Plantations in Western Canada for Bioethanol Production

2015· article· en· W2797572792 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBioenergy crop production and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiofuelProduction (economics)AgroforestryAgricultural economicsBioenergyNatural resource economicsEconomicsForestryEnvironmental scienceBusinessGeographyBiotechnologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This two papers thesis explores the economics of hybrid poplar plantations as a potential bioethanol feedstock in Canada. The first paper (Chapter 2) is the stand-level analysis of the financial viability of producing hybrid poplar on private lands for both single-stem and coppice production systems. The results suggest that the coppice system is financially inferior to the single stem. But the single-stem production system could be financially feasible, given the current land and biomass prices and a real discount rate of less than 4.6%. The second paper (Chapter 3) is the forest-level analysis. In this model, public lands are considered to investigate the impacts of different policies on the NPV of a stylized forestry firm for both juvenile and split mature initial forest inventories. The investigated policy variables include varying even-flow conditions, allowing the exotic plantations on public lands, and accounting for sequestered carbon. The results show that permitting hybrid poplar plantations on public lands not only results in higher NPVs, but also leads to more non-harvested lands. Also, the results indicate that accounting for sequestered carbon does not always lead to an increase in the firm`s total NPV. The reason is that carbon sequestration has a dynamic nature that depends on several factors in each scenario. In addition, when the forestry firm maximizes the timber NPV instead of both timber and carbon NPV, there is always a social cost of not considering carbon that actually has value.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score0.754

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.146 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it